Municipal waste generation and socioeconomic drivers: Evidence from comparing Northern and Southern Italy

Journal of Environment and Development

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 51-69

  Mazzanti, Massimiliano ^a   Montini, Anna ^b   Zoboli, Roberto ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FERRARA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITÀ CATTOLICA DEL SACRO CUORE   (Italy)

Author keywords

Delinking; Environmental Kuznets curves; Municipal solid waste; Panel data; Socioeconomic drivers; Waste policy

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; EUROPEAN UNION; HOUSEHOLD INCOME; KUZNETS CURVE; MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

EURASIA; EUROPE; ITALY; SOUTHERN EUROPE;

EID: 39049132222     PISSN: 10704965     EISSN: 15525465     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1070496507312575     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Andersen, F., Larsen, H., Skovgaard, M., Moll, S., & Isoard, S. (2007). A European model for waste and material flows. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 49(4), 421-435.
2. Andreoni, J., & Levinson, A. (2001). The simple analytics of the environmental Kuznets curve. Journal of Public Economics, 80, 269-286.
3. Apat. (2002). Rapporto rifiuti 2002 [Waste report 2002]. Rome: Ministry of the Environment. Available from http://www.apat.it
4. Apat. (2003). Rapporto rifiuti 2003 [Waste report 2003]. Rome: Ministry of the Environment. Available from http://www.apat.it
5. Apat. (2004). Rapporto rifiuti 2004 [Waste report 2004]. Rome: Ministry of the Environment. Available from http://www.apat.it
6. Apat. (2005). Rapporto rifiuti 2005 [Waste report 2005]. Rome: Ministry of the Environment. Available from http://www.apat.it
7. Beede, D., & Bloom, D. (1995). Economics of the generation and management of MSW (NBER Working Paper No. 5116). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
8. Berrens, R., Bohara, A., Gawande, K., & Wang, P. (1998). Testing the inverted U hypothesis for US hazardous waste. An application of the generalized gamma model. Economic Letters, 55(3), 435-440.
9. Bringezu, S., Schütz, H., & Moll, S. (2003). Rationale for and interpretation of economy-wide material flow analysis and derived indicators. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 7(2), 43-64.
10. Brock, W., & Taylor, S. (2003). The kindergarten rule of sustainable growth (NBER Working Paper No. 9597). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
11. Brock, W., & Taylor, S. (2004). The Green Solow model (NBER Working Paper No. 10557). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
12. Cagatay, S., & Mihci, H. (2006). Degree of environmental stringency and the impact on trade patterns. Journal of Economic Studies, 33(1), 30-51.
13. Cole, M., Elliott, R., & Fredrikkson, P. (2006). Endogenous pollution haves: Does FDI influence environmental regulations? Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 108(1), 157-178.
14. Cole, M., Rayner, A., & Bates, J. (1997). The EKC: An empirical analysis. Environment and Development Economics, 2, 401-416.
15. Concu, N. (2000). La tirannia del trade off sconfitta? Turismo, ambiente naturale e rifiuti solidi urbani: La ricerca di una EKC [Is the tyranny of the trade-off defeated? Tourism, environment, and municipal solid waste: Finding an EKC]. Cagliari, Italy: CRENOS.
16. Copeland, B.R., & Taylor, M.S. (2004). Trade, growth and the environment. Journal of Economic Literature, 42, 7-71.
17. Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs. (2003). Sustainable consumption and production indicators. London: Author.
18. Dinda, S. (2004). Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: A survey. Ecological Economics, 49, 431-455.
19. European Commission. (2003a). Towards a thematic strategy for waste prevention and recycling (COM (2003) 301). Brussels, Belgium: Author.
20. European Commission. (2003b). Towards a thematic strategy on sustainable use of natural resources (COM (2003) 572). Brussels, Belgium: Author.
21. European Environment Agency. (2003a). Assessment of information related to waste and material flows. Copenhagen, Denmark: Author.
22. European Environment Agency. (2003b). Europe's environment: The third assessment. Copenhagen, Denmark: Author.
23. European Environment Agency. (2003c). Evaluation analysis of the implementation of the packaging directive. Copenhagen, Denmark: Author.
24. Eurostat. (2003). Waste generated and treated in Europe. Data 1990-2001. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
25. Fischer-Kowalski, M., & Amann, C. (2001). Beyond IPAT and Kuznets curves: Globalization as a vital factor in analyzing the environmental impact of socioeconomic metabolism. Population and the Environment, 23(1), 7-47.
26. Fonkych, K., & Lempert, R. (2005). Assessment of environmental Kuznets curves and socioeconomic drivers in IPCC's SRES scenarios. Journal of Environment & Development, 14(1), 27-47.
27. Jacobsen, H., Mazzanti, M., Moll, S., Simeone, M.G., Pontoglio, S., & Zoboli, R. (2004). Methodology and indicators to measure decoupling, resource efficiency, and waste prevention. Report of the European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark.
28. Johnstone, N., & Labonne, J. (2004). Generation of household solid waste in OECD countries: An empirical analysis using macroeconomic data. Land Economics, 80(4), 529-538.
29. Karousakis, K. (2006, March). MSW generation, disposal and recycling: A note on OECD intercountry differences. Paper presented at ENVECON 2006: Applied Environmental Economics Conference, London.
30. Lieb, C.M. (2004). The environmental Kuznets curve and flow versus stock pollution: The neglect of future damages. Environmental and Resource Economics, 29(4), 483-506.
31. Lim, J. (1997). The effects of economic growth on environmental quality: Some empirical investigation for the case of South Korea. Seoul Journal of Economics, 10, 272-293.
32. Mazzanti, M. (in press). Is waste generation delinking from economic growth? Applied Economics Letters.
33. Mazzanti, M., & Zoboli, R. (2005). Delinking and environmental Kuznets curves for waste indicators in Europe. Environmental Sciences, 2(4), 409-425.
34. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2002). Indicators to measure decoupling of environmental pressure from economic growth. Paris: Author.
35. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2003). Response indicators for waste prevention within the OECD area (ENV/EPOC/WGWPR/ SE(2003)2). Paris: Author.
36. Pearce, D.W. (2004). Does European Union waste policy pass a cost benefit test? World Economics, 5, 115-137.
37. Raymond, L. (2004). Economic growth as environmental policy? Reconsidering the environmental Kuznets curve. Journal of Public Policy, 24, 327-348.
38. Seppala, T., Haukioja, T., & Kaivo-oja, J. (2001). The EKC hypothesis does not hold for direct material flows: Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis tests for direct material flows in five industrial countries. Population and Environment, 23(2), 217-238.
39. Stern, D. (1998). Progress on the environmental Kuznets curve? Environment and Development Economics, 3, 173-196.
40. Stern, D. (2004). The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Development, 32(8), 1419-1438.
41. Wang, P., Bohara, A., Berrens, R., & Gawande, K. (1998). A risk based environmental Kuznets curve for US hazardous waste sites. Applied Economics Letters, 5, 761-763.
42. World Bank. (1992). Development and the environment. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.